Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: What Is The Credit Union Difference?
Posted in:
* Subscribers knew about this particular caucus in advance…
The sponsor of a bill that would replace Illinois’ current abortion law with language that is less restrictive said Wednesday she feels the bill will be moving forward, even after it was previously stalled in subcommittee.
The Reproductive Health Act, sponsored by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, would, among other provisions, make it so everyone has “a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions” about their reproductive health. It also requires private health insurance companies that cover pregnancy-related benefits to cover abortion and allows physician-assistants to perform the procedure.
The bill had previously been put into the House Human Services committee and moved to the Informed Consent subcommittee, before being pushed back to the Rules Committee.
Cassidy said at the end of a caucus meeting, House Speaker Michael Madigan did confirm he would entertain a request for a hearing on the bill in a different committee. She said she did not know which committee it would be. […]
“I feel like we’ll be moving forward (with the bill),” Cassidy said.
* Meanwhile…
Rep. Cheri Bustos of Moline, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has pulled out of a fundraising event for anti-abortion Rep. Dan Lipinski, highlighting the growing concerns in the party about abortion rights.
In a statement sent out on Twitter, Bustos said that she had agreed to attend a fundraiser for Lipinski several months ago, “but I’ve determined that I must cancel my participation in this event.”
“I’m proud to have a 100 percent pro-choice voting record and I’m deeply alarmed by the rapidly escalating attacks on women’s access to reproductive care in several states,” Bustos said.
Lipinski, a conservative Democrat from Western Springs who faces a rematch with abortion rights supporter Marie Newman next year, said in a statement that in discussions with Bustos this week “it became clear that her attendance at a fundraiser for me has become a distraction from her work.”
* More…
The decision, which was first reported by the New York Times, is a clear nod to progressive members and outside groups, who have also criticized Bustos for codifying a DCCC policy that prohibits vendors and consultants from working with candidates challenging incumbents since March. Her decision to fundraise with Lipinski added more fuel to the fire.
Bustos stands by the policy and has given no indication that she will reverse course, which has continue to irritate the caucus’s left flank, particularly lawmakers who, themselves, ousted more moderate incumbent Democrats.
“It’s a smart move and I’m glad she listening to progressive voices,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who has sharply criticized Bustos’ for her handling of the vendor policy. “I appreciate that Cheri has shown a willingness to listen and change. I hope she’ll take the same approach on the vendor blacklist issue. I remain committed to sitting down with her and seeking a principled compromise.”
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 9:11 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: What Is The Credit Union Difference?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I am so elated that the brick is off the RHA.
This is so so important for our state to do in the face of Alabama, Texas, Missouri and other states going the other way.
This has got to get passed
NOW
As the old labor song goes
Which Side Are You On?
It’s the time to choose
A womans right to choose.
I stand unequivocally with choice.
Illinois is
and should always be
on the side of
women’s self determination.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 9:26 am
–“I appreciate that Cheri has shown a willingness to listen and change. I hope she’ll take the same approach on the vendor blacklist issue,” (Khanna said).
I’m guessing she won’t, because it’s her job to defeat incumbent Republicans, not incumbent Democrats.
You’d think that wouldn’t be a difficult concept to understand for those who’ve experienced the virtually powerless and useless status of being in the House minority.
The instant-gratification generation of DC Dem purists might want to take a look up-and-down Pennsylvania Ave. at their GOP colleagues in Congress and the executive branch and give it a re-think as to whether defeating Dem incumbents is really the top priority in these interesting times with which we’ve been blessed.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 9:31 am
May this get enacted. Illinois needs to be a safeguard against the backwardness and attack on women’s rights in red states, like Talibama (h/t to whoever came up with that one).
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 9:33 am
Nothing protects a woman’s right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness more, and nothing protects a womans health more than ending her life before she is born.
For all of the New-speak on “Women’s Health” there is no consideration for the human life most effected by abortion.
Comment by SOIL M Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 9:57 am
===For all of the New-speak on “Women’s Health”…===
Let me guess, you’re not a woman?
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:03 am
I said this on a previous thread, but at this point the RHA is an economic development tool. It’s one way to position IL as an attractive place to live for people concerned about the right to choose and reproductive health.
Also, enormously the right thing to do. Glad to see the brick come off.
Comment by lakeside Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:03 am
47th - he also seems to think all fetuses are female?
Oh wait, I remember this part of Jurassic Park.
Comment by lakeside Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:04 am
“
- lakeside - Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:04 am:”
More then half are female.
If you kick all of us Pro-lifers out of the Democratic Party, we will not just go away. We will vote for people who protect life
Comment by Evanston Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:15 am
Wordslinger nailed it as usual - be careful what you wish for.
The RHA is just the right thing to do. I do believe that there are moral, decent people who are opposed to women’s choice due to their background, upbringing, beliefs, whatever.
The truth about abortion is that it is a difficult choice for a woman to make; and often a last resort. This State must protect that right to choose. It must protect the integrity of a woman’s body. And we must become a more caring, more compassionate state.
Comment by State of DenIL Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:16 am
“- State of DenIL - Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:16 am”
I respect your post. We do work to give women options. We help them before and after the birth of their child. We give them hope and a way to have the child and still be able to live the life that they want while being a parent.
The child is important and what is done in a termination, the actual procedure is scary.
Comment by Evanston Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:22 am
She’ll never be Speaker and at this rate she won’t be a Senator either.
Comment by Precinct Captain Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:24 am
“The instant-gratification generation of DC Dem purists…”
Standing up for abortion rights and LGBTQ rights isn’t “purity.” These are bedrock rights under constant, relentless siege from the GOP that everyone who calls herself a Democrat shouldn’t hesitate to support. Even if you don’t care about actual humans and only care to look at the cold political calculations, there is no risk that throwing the homophobic, anti-choice Lipinski under the bus is going to result in a Republican winning IL-3. It’s a D+6 district where the GOP’s last candidate was a literal Nazi. Newman frankly will be the better candidate anyway; she’s out-raising Lipinski and has the energy of the grassroots behind her.
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:31 am
“I said this on a previous thread, but at this point the RHA is an economic development tool. It’s one way to position IL as an attractive place to live for people concerned about the right to choose and reproductive health.”
Yup. Bingo.
Illinois should be blasting this message to every woman aged 18-34 in red states. Let’s use social policy to drive in-migration.
Same deal with the cannabis bill. It’s an issue that is overwhelmingly supported by people under the age of 55. Let’s give them a reason to want to move (or stay!) in Illinois.
Comment by sulla Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:33 am
==We do work to give women options.==
If the “pro-life” movement really was about options, we’d all be on the same side.
Comment by yinn Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:33 am
Evanston - you are more than welcome in the party of your choice (I’m not sure where you got that I either said that or speak for the Dems?)
But you don’t get to create your own facts. Abortion is not a ’scary’ procedure - it is an outpatient medical procedure; you go home the same day. Plus, approximately 25-30% of all abortions consist of taking two sets of pills.
One can disagree morally with abortion, I respect that - but the attempts to make it a boogeyman bodily harm issue (especially considering the risks of pregnancy) are not constructive to debate.
Comment by lakeside Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:34 am
Looks like there is no room in the party of tolerance for those who don’t agree with killing babies…reprobate minds
Comment by Verd Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:35 am
If the “pro-life” movement really was about options, we’d all be on the same side.
Exactly
The problem Evanston is that we have entered an
entirely different
legal arena.
The cases set up to challenge Roe v. Wade
eliminate
all agency from a woman and her body.
And frankly Evanston
I feel it is absolutely
morally vacuous to advocate “options”
for a raped woman
who is forced to give birth
to her rapists child.
(yes this is strong stuff. I will be as calm cool and respectful as possible with my posts)
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:44 am
It seems to me that the pro-life movement in Illinois would be better served by trying to reduce the demand. Pushing for more birth control availability as well as better options for parents for child care, insurace, etc. might be a better approach. If you address the “whys” you might be more effective in accomplishing (or at least getting closer to your goal) that trying to change the law.
Comment by OneMan Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:45 am
Point of information, somebody with Verd’s IP address argued against “forced inoculation” in a recent post.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 10:46 am
===Standing up for abortion rights and LGBTQ rights isn’t “purity.” These are bedrock rights under constant, relentless siege from the GOP that everyone who calls herself a Democrat shouldn’t hesitate to support===
Couple points…
1- those bedrock rights aren’t under siege in this state.
2- Good luck expanding the map with that point of view and furthering the agenda that you claim to support. You’re going to have to accept people with different points of view on these issues if you don’t want Congress, the Presidency, and the Judiciary being controlled by the GOP and therefore enacting these kinds of laws.
3- “everyone who calls herself a Democrat” is pretty telling here. There are still men out there, at least for now, that call themselves Democrats.
Comment by Boone's is Back Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 11:11 am
“Point of information, somebody with Verd’s IP address argued against “forced inoculation” in a recent post.”
What’s your point Rich Miller?
Comment by Ernie Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 11:24 am
I’m uncomfortable with the whole “economic development tool” angle.
Really?
That’s not why anyone or this state should pass the RHA.
I’m profoundly disturbed by the partition effect the fall of Roe v. Wade could have on our country.
It seems a perverse capitalistic way of thinking about it.
Illinois will prosper because of it.
Yikes
I find that so…..ick
I don’t want Illinois to become
an abortion assembly line destination.
I just want to provide
maximum agency for women
to make a decision with their doctor.
To make a choice
of what to do.
I find it gross to monetize this, to revel in economic development advantage.
Loving God you’re missing the point.
And you play right into the fears of
folks with legitimate opposition to abortion.
Ugh
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 11:25 am
The bills were tabled because they were extreme for even pro-choice democrats. The brick has only been lifted because of the national media coverage of what’s happening in Alabama et al. It’s an emotional reaction, not a strong policy one. Last I checked, what they do in Alabama has no bearing on what happens here in Illinois, especially since we passed HB40…
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 11:55 am
Any proposed law should include a parental notification process. My 12-year old son recently had surgery for a compound leg fracture–it was scary for him, and for his parents. Parents need to be able to guide their children through any major medical surgery.
It makes no sense to me that a 16 year old in Chicago needs parental permission to go to a tanning salon, and does not need parental permission to get an abortion. How inconsistent is that?
Comment by ajjacksson Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 11:58 am
==1- those bedrock rights aren’t under siege in this state.==
Are you not aware that Lipinski serves in the federal legislature, i.e. the body that makes law for the entire country? Do you not think that federal anti-choice legislation will be the new item on the menu when Roe falls? Are you unaware of the multiple Republican efforts in Congress and in the White House to oppose LGBTQ rights?
==2- Good luck expanding the map with that point of view and furthering the agenda that you claim to support.==
Democrats are not going to “expand the map” by catering to the GOP’s view on abortion, which is wildly unpopular across the country, let alone Illinois: https://www.thenation.com/article/americans-pro-choice-democrats-act-like/
==3- “everyone who calls herself a Democrat” is pretty telling here.==
There is something very telling in this exchange, but it’s not anything I wrote.
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 12:00 pm
Look, at this point
I believe Roe v Wade
will probably fall.
Once it does
the Pro Life assault
will turn towards the Pro Choice states.
The RHA strengthens the Ramparts and bolsters the gates legally.
The RHA will protect the women of this state
It will give them
maximum agency
in their choice.
Passing RHA will limit the legal routes to taking away women’s agency.
The Pro life folks will then do what they have heretofore not done.
Be actually Pro Life
Helping the children
Helping the poor
Helping the Disabled
Helping the Elderly
Helping the marginalized
Helping life
not just fetuses.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 12:19 pm
–Are you not aware that Lipinski serves in the federal legislature, i.e. the body that makes law for the entire country? Do you not think that federal anti-choice legislation will be the new item on the menu when Roe falls?–
Are you aware that it is Bustos’ job to devote finite DCCC resources to elect those who will vote for Pelosi for Speaker rather than McCarthy or Scalise?
Are you aware of the power of the House Speaker to advance or stop any and all legislation?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 12:32 pm
-The bills were tabled because they were extreme for even pro-choice democrats.-
Nope, I don’t think so.
I think it had to do with Madigans political calculus known only to him.
Not because it was too extreme.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 12:41 pm
==Are you aware that it is Bustos’ job to devote finite DCCC resources to elect those who will vote for Pelosi for Speaker rather than McCarthy or Scalise?==
Did I miss when Marie Newman said she’s going to vote for a GOP speaker?
Look, I know you’re supposedly the wise old pontificator (or whatever) around here, but some things don’t get traded away, not in a decent society, and certainly not in the Democratic party of 2019. Abortion rights and LGBTQ rights are two of those things. Frankly the people whose lives are put at risk by anti-choice, homophobic legislators like Lipinski are tired of having to defend their basic humanity in the face of your “institutionalism at any cost” values.
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 12:50 pm
===Abortion rights and LGBTQ rights are two of those things.===
Purity tests? Really? It’s like you haven’t learned anything about the downfall of the once-mighty ILGOP.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:00 pm
I’m hardly an “institutionalist at any cost” (or whatever) and no one has to defend their basic humanity to me.
Enjoy the view from up on your cross (or whatever). But here on the ground it’s clear to see that there are far more dangerous threats to “basic humanity” today that take priority over flipping one vote for a Dem House speaker for another.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:02 pm
You are literally taking the position that “the finite resources of the DCCC” are more important than the right to abortion. If that’s not institutionalism at any cost, I don’t know what is. Enjoy your day.
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:15 pm
===homophobic legislators like Lipinski ===
So now he’s homophobic bc he doesn’t share your stance on abortion? I’m starting to think that Anon is Marie Newman herself.
Comment by Boone's is Back Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:25 pm
“So now he’s homophobic bc he doesn’t share your stance on abortion?”
No, he’s homophobic because he is famously opposed to LGBTQ rights: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Lipinski#LGBT_rights
Comment by Anon Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:29 pm
–You are literally taking the position that “the finite resources of the DCCC” are more important than the right to abortion.–
LOL, your Jump to Conclusion mat is, literally, whack.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 1:59 pm
I’ve always been vexed at the language used to discuss reproduction. A few things…
A fertilized egg is not sufficient for human life. It takes a fertilized egg, implanted in a viable womb, and approximately 9 months of gestation for a human life to be created. The notion that a fertilized egg equates life is an arbitrary and fallacious argument.
A fetus, while it has the potential to be a person, is not a person. A fetus becomes a person when it can survive outside a womb. There’s a considerable difference between a potential state of existence and an actual state of existence. Think acorn and oak tree.
To portray a fetus as a person is an emotionally manipulative contrivance used by anti-choice supporters.
For me, the most important reason to protect a woman’s reproductive rights is because without them, women have no rights at all.
Comment by Lake Cook Mom Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 4:30 pm
===For me, the most important reason to protect a woman’s reproductive rights is because without them, women have no rights at all.===
Well said. Exactly right. I’m not pro-abortion, no one is. I want women to have the same rights as men.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 4:37 pm
Honeybear, you are correct. Being “pro life” means taking care of the orphans, widows, elderly, and all others who are underprivileged. I wish there were more people that would see pro life in that light.
Comment by ajjacksson Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 5:25 pm
==Illinois is
and should always be
on the side of
women’s self determination.==
Trust Women.
Comment by Enviro Thursday, May 23, 19 @ 5:45 pm
==The Pro life folks will then do what they have heretofore not done. Be actually Pro Life.==
The way forward is clear. If you want to reduce abortions get universal health care.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031202287.html
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Friday, May 24, 19 @ 7:25 am